Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' started by Thread Manager, Jul 2, 2017.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]521943[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]518583[/split]
This is the best that I can hope for at this point.
I honestly believe that naming her Michelle is just allowing them to test the waters and giving them a way out if they decide to go another direction. After all, Zendaya is only just Michelle. She isn't really Mary Jane.
Basically this. Raimi has said that his MJ was an amalgam of love interests like Gwen Stacy and Betty Brant (neither of which were heavily featured in the OT). So it seems the more flamboyant aspects of the MJ character were removed to accommodate the story changes. IMO she became bland at best, and depressive at worst. Adding the heavier elements of MJ to a Gwen Stacy personality just made for an unlikable character.
i feel like the reason i feel michelle isn't like mj personality-wise is that she comes off a bit mean which mj never was but if it had been just the one throwaway line in the movie it would've been fine, but it's zendaya's insistence that michelle is, by her own words:
1) weird, says weird things at the wrong times.
2) wouldn't care less if she found out Peter Parker was Spider-Man. He can fly across NYC using spider webbing, you say? Who cares!
3) "My character is not romantic. My character is like very dry, awkward, intellectual and because she's so smart, she just feels like she doesn't need to talk to people. Like, 'My brain is so far ahead of you that you're just not really on my level.' So she comes off very weird."
that just throws me off. i don't remember any version of mj giving off that vibe. mj is sassy and doesn't take any crap but she's not mean about it. she doesn't go around calling people losers for no reason and thinking she's better than others because wow she reads. plus, the whole name thing.
Well yeah, I do find it kind of peculiar that they apparently never reveal what her last name is.
Exactly, that's not Mary Jane.
For no reason?? Peter and Ned were being creepy...they basically admitted it themselves! The whole idea of her not caring about anyone or about what Peter is up to, thinking she's better, etc. is so very clearly a facade. I mean, that's obvious from her "my friends are up there!" scene in one of the trailers. I'm certain she is going to "soften" and we will learn that a lot of her "meanness" is just an act or defense mechanism. As for her character not being romantic, well yeah...because Peter is crushing on Liz right now. That doesn't mean things won't change, that we won't see more character/romantic development in future movies.
Of course none of know the thought process behind the "Michelle = MJ" twist right now. But I don't think it's an easter egg or a bait and switch tactic or proof that Marvel is testing the waters. I think Feige, Watts and Co. already know what they want to do. Why they chose this route...well, who knows. Hopefully, we'll get some answers.
All I can tell you is that I am not a fan so far af the way they decided to go about it.
Yep same here.
Yep. All of this. And as someone asked in the last page or so of the other part to this thread about comic vs movie MJ, and to add onto what fuflipflops stated as well, the main inconsistency with movie MJ besides being an amalgamation is that they have never truly presented the duality of the character.
Much like Peter has a duality between being Pete and Spider-Man, MJ also has one. The Raimi films touched upon one aspect of her character but they forgot her mask. MJ's fun personality that she uses to hide her loneliness, her past, her family issues, etc is a major part of who she is and helps define her. But they also left out her strength, her wit, and her ability to drop the guise and be a very compassionate being. MJ is complex, she's flawed, deep, and nuanced. The perfect foil to Peter. We've yet to see this portrayed on screen.
This Michelle character may indeed have more in common with Mary Jane than Raimi's version did as far as personality goes with regard to the hidden aspect of MJ--the introverted pieces. But again, I don't really see the duality presented accurately. Of course as I theorized, this may either just be a different character with some parts of MJ included or possibly a version of MJ that has yet to develop that extroverted side. This is just a HS aged version of MJ potentially, not the college aged one we meet in the comics.
Hello, new user here! Guys, have you considered that Zendaya as MJ is a red herring? Think about it for a second. The way Michelle acts and dresses is almost identical to how Gwen acted and dressed in the Ultimate comics. Furthermore, the way Michelle has been described ("awkward, "dry", and "intellectual") could also apply to the SSM incarnation of Gwen. That's probably where Watts got the idea to frumpy up Michelle. So Michelle is actually the Gwen Stacy of the MCU, not the MJ. It would explain why they decided to name her Michelle instead of Gwen. Since she was the main love interest of the previous continuity, they would have given her a different name in order to distance themselves from that continuity. The costuming department going out of their way to make Betty Brant visually similar to classic Gwen is another red herring. After all, Marvel loves pulling surprises.
For further reference:
I agree completely well put
most of the reviews I've read have praised Zendaya's character.
and a word that I see being used frequently in these reviews to describe "Michelle" is "sardonic."
if you look up the definition of sardonic, it can mean:
disdainfully or skeptically humorous : derisively mocking
grimly mocking or cynical
characterized by bitter or scornful derision; mocking; cynical; sneering
so, that word has a somewhat negative tone to it. And it does match the descriptions we've got of her character ( from Zendaya herself ) and from what we've seen in the trailers and clips.
while Michelle does have humor/wit, it's more of a "biting/mean/dry" wit.
and frankly, that doesn't resemble any version of Mary Jane.
MJ can be direct and have humor/wit, but it's more playful and sassy.
It's actually a bit ironic to hear that.
Growing up with both comics and manga, MJ always reminded me of this other character named Nami from a manga called One Piece. Both fiery redheads, sassy, had abusive fathers and pretended to be shallower than they were to hide their loneliness. Difference is while MJ hid it through the party girl persona, Nami hid it through a persona closer to Michelle's. Lastly, both are considered sex symbols in their respective cultures.
So if they're going for a more Nami-esque take of MJ, I wouldn't hate it. Maybe it's not ideal, but they're both fantastic archetypes nevertheless.
but see, when you say that, that just reinforces that MJ and the "Michelle" like Nami are 2 different character types, despite the similarities they may have. They aren't really interchangeable despite having similar traits or backstories.
if they adapted a live action One Piece film, and the film Nami acted more like party girl MJ, would you be ok with that? What if film Nami is now also a brunette or blonde or green haired character and looks nothing like how Nami is supposed to look?
If I were a fan of the manga and Nami in particular, I don't think I would stand for that because it's giving her a different ( near opposite ) personality. and totally different look as well.
you know what I mean?
Frankly, I don't care if she is Mary Jane or not.
If I like the character, then it won't matter to me.
has it been clarified that Marvel/Disney owns Michelle? It would suck if it turns out that Sony/Columbia ends up owning her and she can't be used in the comics.
What's the point though? All she is Mary-Jane with a name and race change... Isn't she?
and looks change.
and style change.
and personality change.
Obviously I'll have to wait and see how this plays out over the series, but for me I'm going to be annoyed if they don't capture the spirit of MJ with this character. I don't really care about the race of the actress playing her, I can even deal with forgoing the red hair, but make her be true to the character she's based on. That's all I ask. If they don't do that...then it just makes me wonder why bother to say she's based on MJ to begin with?
She has been introduced.
Lets see if she seems more like Mary Jane going forward.
Characters evolve as they grow.
Besides even Tom's characterization of Peter isn't the Peter that we know in the comics, not as a fully evolved hero anyway.
Peter's not some athletic jock though with no interest in science.
while it's true that characters evolve and grow ( that's to be expected and desired ), it's not very encouraging or interesting ( to me ) if they start in a place so far removed ( to the point of being opposite ) from where the character should be.
It would be like a Peter who starts out as a dumb jock named Paul who, over the course of the film series, develops a love of science and studying and becomes the smart Peter we all know and love, even changing his name to be Peter cuz it sounds smarter ( or starts using his middle name Peter ).
Such a starting point for Peter does not suit the character at all because that's just not the character.
Same with Zendaya's character if she is indeed the new MJ. Her starting point in this film does not suit the character of Mary Jane Watson at all. She doesn't look like MJ at all. She doesn't act like MJ at all. She doesn't even have the right name.
If this is the starting point for the new MJ, then that doesn't interest me in the slightest and I'd say the writers and creative team have no clue ( or respect frankly ) about the character.
It's so baffling as well because Feige and Watts seem to be fans of Mary Jane....